Abstract:
Research and development (R&D) is thought to be an important determinant of improvements in living standards, health, and economic security. Yet, U.S. government spending on R&D has fallen over time, with further cuts proposed. Two standard rationalizations for such cuts are: (i) citizens support such cuts, and (ii) the marginal social return from R&D is low. We test these using surveys with U.S. citizens and experts. Our evidence rejects both: a large majority of citizens do not favor cuts and, on the contrary, prefer increasing R&D spending; and a large majority of experts judge the marginal social returns from increasing R&D spending to be high, with the average belief placing benefits at about $3 per dollar invested. Experts underestimate public support, indicating that they misperceive the political feasibility of increasing R&D spending.
